From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 19 Jun 2001 20:20:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 19 Jun 2001 20:20:07 -0400 Received: from marine.sonic.net ([208.201.224.37]:9734 "HELO marine.sonic.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Tue, 19 Jun 2001 20:19:58 -0400 X-envelope-info: Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 17:19:45 -0700 From: Mike Castle To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Alan Cox quote? (was: Re: accounting for threads) Message-ID: <20010619171945.I6778@thune.mrc-home.com> Reply-To: Mike Castle Mail-Followup-To: Mike Castle , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.18i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 19, 2001 at 04:56:16PM -0700, Jonathan Lundell wrote: > But so what? That's $16 worth of DRAM (I just checked). Not so bad > *if* threads are otherwise a great solution. I grant that one might > have a pretty tough time making the case, but again, for the right > application, say some app with a dedicated server, 73MB isn't the end > of the world (though I suppose it was at the time...). How much would 73MB of cache cost? How much would it cost to get that much on the CPU? mrc -- Mike Castle dalgoda@ix.netcom.com www.netcom.com/~dalgoda/ We are all of us living in the shadow of Manhattan. -- Watchmen fatal ("You are in a maze of twisty compiler features, all different"); -- gcc